Hmmm. If someone threatens me with a gun, according to the laws of most countries, I am allowed to defend myself, even if it is by blowing his head off with a bigger gun. One of the nice things on the internet was that, setting aside the scriptkiddies and their adolescent behaviour, people reacted differently. However we caught up with real life, as was to be expected and we are no longer talking about the need to shoot back, but the size of the gun. Why would we look upon the idea of a "code-green" variant, whichever it will be as "immoral" and "unethical" ? If your son decides to have unprotected sex at age 15, do you hand him a condom and explain why he should use, despite the fact that he is legally to young ? Or do you let him do whatever he had planned and run the risk of catching another sort of virus ? Moral and ethics turn any discussion into a geese and gander story and it should not be the point. So many brilliancy on these lists, more then anyone could ever start to imagine, and yet we are stuck in a discussion about ethics and morals where we could work on the given and find a solution from there. It has long been clear that large conglomerates, beit ISP's or software vendors, do not really care for "your" problems. the @home reaction is just as typical as the M$ reaction. When someone blows your T1/T3 out of the cable through a simply started dDoS just because they want to, or they believe that one of the services you host has been "not nice", the reaction of those same "conglomerates is that "they cannot filter" for numerous reasons, but a bill for bandwidth is forthcoming. Down from soapbox and back to brilliance, is it really so hard with a combined effort, to create a retaliation program that does less then what is happening now and stays withing ethic boundries ? I for one would not like anything crawling into my servers, well intended or mal-intended. But.... with all those servers we also control a lot of routers, a lot of "deny" files, wouldn't it feasible to "register" the "probe" as we do now and instead of analyzing or retaliating with a "friendly" worm, we would immediately update our routingtables and filters ? not theirs, ours. Limiting the ip access to our routers and or services. The way i see it is that a: the users would start complaining pretty soon when he can not go where he wants anymore and i let you have 3 guesses as to where he goes with that complaint. The idea is based on irc sub7 scans and subsequent banning, it works erasnable there, why not with all these resources would it work here ? anyway, just my ramblings, i've always been against shooting back, before you know it they buy canons and outmatch my .44 abel wisman P.S. if someone really feels this should be discussed beyond the timelimit set by BB, i am gladly willing to set up a forum or whatever medium you want, just holler AW
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Sep 06 2001 - 17:02:47 PDT